Talk:USS John L. Canley

Keel laid date
The keel-laying ceremony for USS John L. Canley on 25 June 2022 was made up, the actually lays keel for she was on 16 November 2020 without any ceremony, according to NASSCO's official twitter account, which was because of the COVID-19 pandemic, otherwise, constriction works of the ship couldn't have been built so quickly. (she has been fully shaped up, in the photograph, on the day it was christened) So the actual keel laid date is important and why did you remove it in this edit? Maritime guy (talk) 01:15, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * When linking to an edit, it's often better to link the diff to show what changes were actually made. The April 2022 date was already supported by a US Navy ref, so I'm not sure why you removed that in favour of that nassco video, (which supported the same date anyway). Meanwhile, that Twitter post from 2020 doesn't even mention keel laying. The argument you're presenting here is a mix of WP:OR & WP:SYNTH. And finally, did you review your edit before saving? (Or after? Or since?) Your edit left a in the infobox and there were issues with grammar, spelling and chronology in the prose as well. A revert was called for. -  w o lf  02:24, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Moved the first block of the new build ship into the shipyard's shipway isn't the keel laid? What about recently Enterprise (CVN-80)? New future USS Enterprise completed a non-public keel laid, on 5 April this year, via moving its' first block into the shipway in the same way. You can't treat actually lay down for USS John L. Canley differently because of it was not an official announcement as the keel laying. Additionally, you mentioned that there are grammar, spelling and chronology in the prose in my edit, which I will take care in the later time. But I can't fix the error in the infobox personally, I hope others will fix it in the related template. Maritime guy (talk) 10:50 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I can't speak to the Enterprise page, I didn't make any recent edits there regarding the laying of her keel. I can only speak to this article. You haven't provided a source for an alternarive keel laying date. Addtionally, you don't make edits that intentionally leave errors and other problems behind to either fix at a "later time" or just hope that someone else will do it. If your edit doesn't improve the article - don't make it! The info you were trying to add was not so critical that it just had to be added at the expense of article quality. If you see a problem with the infobox, then ask for help, that's what talk pages and all the other editor resources are for. So again, given the above, I stand by my edit. - w o lf  20:23, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * So, what do you think is "keel laid" other than that? Is it when the second or third block was joined to the first? Or do you have a better point in time? And with regard to the in the infobox, I think it's an error within the related template, not all on me. After all, I haven't had this problem before when editing other articles on enwp by IP. Maritime guy (talk) 10:50, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
 * If you think what I have added is not so critical, can you explain why future USS John L. Canley was able to reach complete most of an approx. 91,000 tons ship in two months? And it was done without god help! Maritime guy (talk) 10:59, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
 * At this point, I'm not that certain that you've read my replies to you, (or if you have, that you understood them), and also at this point, what is it you are seeking with these continued posts? - w o lf  15:37, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I just want you to know what keel laid is and the importance of the actual keel laid for future USS John L. Canley. Also, you haven't answered my question above. Maritime guy (talk) 02:25, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

This is not about what you think I know or don't know, or what you claim to know... WP content must be clearly supported by reliable sourcing. (See Verifiability, not truth.) I think we're done here. - w o lf  04:45, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * So you consider this NASSCO's twitter account, which is in the twitter icon at the bottom of the company's website, isn't a reliable source? OK! But why are twitter accounts in INS Karanj (S23) (ref 3), INS Vela (S24) (ref 3 and 16) and INS Sandhayak (2021) (ref 2 and 8) on enwp considered reliable sources? Don't talk about things like I can only speak to this article as you have New Page Reviewer, Pending Changes Reviewer and Rollbacker etc several titles, they would not become articles that aren't part of enwp because you said them so. Maritime guy (talk) 9:39, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Per WP:TPG, once someone has replied to a post of yours, you shouldn't edit your previous comments, and you certainly shouldn't edit other people's comments. Again, this discussion is about this article, not others, and whatever user rights I do or do not have, are irrelevant here, just as yours are. Since you have nothing new to add, and are now resorting to altering comments, posting off-topic accusations and generally adopting a bad faith attitude, I will again say that I believe we are done here, and you should now let this go. Have a nice day - w o lf  23:00, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I admit that it was my major fault for I edited my previous and other people's comments, but in the same way that you said that the discussion about this article and other articles on enwp or user rights you have are irrelevant here, I have added the content related to the actual date of laying the keel for future USS John L. Canley to this article and I edited the comments also irrelevant here. And, why do you insist considering the NASSCO's official twitter account isn't a reliable source? Maritime guy (talk) 02:00, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Again... either you haven't read my replies or you haven't understood them. I'm not sure if this is a language barrier issue, a competency issue, (or if you're just trolling now). You're claiming I've written things that I clearly haven't written, and this whole thread has become a timesink. We're talking about the keel laying date: the nassco twitter post that you keep going on about ''does. not. mention. "keel laying".'' Meanwhile, a nassco press release and a USN source, along with another source added today, all clearly support the date currently listed. Even if you were to find a source that clearly states the date your seeking to add, it would just contradict those three sources... iow, this is more trouble than it's worth and well past the point where you need to drop this and move on to something else, something more productive. - w o lf  05:03, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
 * You think that the date of the actual date of laying the keel for future USS John L. Canley that I want to add would just contradict the date of the ceremony for the ship, which is supported by three references in the article. Then the USS Delaware (SSN-791) and USS Vermont (SSN-792), who both have the actual dates of commissioning and the date of the commissioning ceremony because of the same public health concerns over the COVID-19 pandemic, the respective two dates should be contradicted each other by your reasoning, but the fact is that they clearly didn't.


 * And on the question of whether moved the first block of the new build ship into the shipyard's shipway is the keel laid, it is a common sense conclusion in the shipbuilding industry and has nothing to do with whether the term "keel laying" is mentioned or not. This is the same as whether Donald Trump mentioned that he was a white supremacist or not, (even though he publicly denounced white supremacy during his presidency) it doesn't make him any less of a white supremacist, because that is a common sense conclusion on politics by the global population. Maritime guy (talk) 04:35, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * "Covid", "Trump" and "white supremacy"... like I said: this is a timesink. I've had enough of this nonsense and regardless if you're done here or not, I now am. - w o lf  22:34, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

(arbitrary break)

 * It doesn't matter what I've said other above and isn't the point of concern we are talking about, the actual date of laying the keel for the ship and moving the first block of the new build ship into the shipyard's shipway is the keel laid is common sense conclusion in the shipbuilding industry is the point. I hope you can respect the importance of the actual date. Maritime guy (talk) 17:52, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

"It doesn't matter what I've said other[sic] above..." - then this has indeed been a complete waste of time. Instead trying to drag this on any further, and definitely before you edit another article, I strongly suggest read WP:RS, WP:OR & WP:SYNTH, carefully and thoroughly, and ensure you understand them completely. If you have any difficties with that, then I suggest you seek assistance from the Help Desk or one of the other resources Wikipedia has for new users who may be struggling with their edits. WP content is not about what you think you know, or what is generally known as common sense, etc, etc... it's based on sourcing. And with that, I'll again suggest you read WP:VNT as well. You have less than 50 edits so far. There is a steep learning curve here with numerous policies & guidelines, along with a manual of style, that dictate how WP and its articles are constructed. Take your time, read, learn, ask for help and, don't take constructive criticism personally. - w o lf  21:42, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I have said above that the official NASSCO twitter account is a reliable source, it was many times. Besides that, the definition of keel lay is a common sense conclusion in the industry, not original research, which you can't refute and you don't have opposition to it now. (Now you've turned to blame me for other issues concerning me such as my experience on enwp) Finally, the actual date of laying the keel that I want to add does not contradict the existing content and sources in the article, as I also mentioned above. So, what are you want to keep on this topic? Maritime guy (talk) 04:25, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Designation
As of Sept. 2023 US Naval register lists the ship as USNS John L. Canley, vice USS like some of the other T-ESB ships. Until such time as this vessel is commissioned recommend changing the title of the page to reflect the name of the ship. See https://www.nvr.navy.mil/SHIPDETAILS/SHIPSDETAIL_ESB_6.HTML 67.231.65.163 (talk) 16:19, 8 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Seems moot at this point as the ship was commissioned on 17 Feb 2024 at NAS North Island and is now USS John L. Canley (ESB 6). BTW, ESB stands for Expeditionary Sea Base - have no idea why someone would think ESB stands for Expeditionary Mobile Base unless they don't understand the concept of acronyms. Here is the navy PR page that connects the dots:

https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2169994/expeditionary-sea-base-esb/